LoneBear wrote:I moved the topic here because I will share my opinions of that situation with members of this forum, but not publicly (no reciprocal relation there!) They are both Tier 1 thinkers, Bundy is blue (devoted Mormon) and Satz is orange (Corporate) and as such, they are "my way or the highway" types.

Most people end up here when they are on the green-yellow transition between Tiers, having become dissatisfied with the answers supplied by the New Age and wanting to see a bigger picture.

The --daniel papers are written in the yellow-turquoise transition, between Larson's systemic and Nehru's holistic perspectives, and reach a bit beyond that to show that there is "more" to the system. If you resonate with those papers, then you're probably in that same transition zone.

But you need to understand that the vMemes are accumulative--like putting tools in your toolbox. Those valuing systems you complete are always there for you to use, when circumstances require it.

The vMemes beyond turquoise are not well defined, and if you look for descriptions of them, they get rather nebulous, quickly. But what I am finding is:

Yellow: systemic yang, you see the bigger picture as "natural consequences" that have a simple, linear relationship (like Larson and the Electric Universe people).

Turquoise: holistic yin, you see the bigger picture as "All is One" due to the nonlocality of the yin perspective (equivalent space). Relationships are planar or volumetric, encompassing regions rather than connect-a-dot.

Coral: systemic power yang, where you see the yin-yang of the two prior vMemes as collective power--"WE can change the world!" And it is obvious how screwed-up the Tier 1 system is, and how easy it would be to fix with Tier 2 understanding. Thea Alexander's Macrophilosophy of 2150 AD has this apprehension, though expressed more in the green, New Age vMeme.

Teal: holistic tribal yin, where you begin to encounter the intelligence in the "system" of Nature (Joey's experience with the missing bit of tent falls here). This is where you encounter the "magic" in Nature.

I could not find any color associations for the remaining two vMemes in Tier 2, but they would be analogous to orange and green, with similar behaviors but on a more collective scale.

You will get flashes of different vMemes at times, which is often called a "peak experience." And when it happens and you pay attention to it, it tends to cause dissatisfaction with the vMeme you are in, causing you to seek new answers to old questions--and evolve.

I wonder how fast children would traverse these vMemes if they grew up in a Tier 2 environment. Shouldn't they even adopt the Tier 2 understanding more or less instantly when people with only Tier 1 understanding are scarce?
Remember the quote Tsarion gave in one of his talks:

Long before a thermonuclear war can come about, we have had to lay waste our own sanity. We begin with the children. It is imperative to catch them in time. Without the most thorough and rapid brainwashing their dirty minds would see through our dirty tricks. Children are not yet fools, but we shall turn them into imbeciles like ourselves, with high I.Q.s if possible.
--Ronald David Laing

Today's education is indeed poison to the mind.
About one and a half years ago I thought about how to restructure school. My conclusion was that it's not worth the time to try restructuring it. You have to set a completely new example. Too bad in Germany it is illegal to not send your kids to school. We have a compulsory school attendance that is not common in other countries. Home schooling is out of the question. So it'd be difficult to find parents who are willing to leave their kids into somebodys hands who wants to set such new example, at least within the country.

I'm giving free tutoring lessons in my spare time right now. Not the usual, boring stick-to-the-material type of lessons but more of an open conversation with many excursuses whenever the student wants or just needs them. That also gives the student the chance to tell his teacher things he might not yet know. (like two days ago when one told me that ice with 10% evenly spread cotton in it is as good as unbreakable)
Sometimes my lessons end up being more of an inspirational pep talk to awaken that spark in them which gives them the inner motivation to actually learn by themselves. My newest student wrote a 2+ (B+) in his last english exam after only 5 hours of tutoring, only one of which was used to actually learn english. Think about the time he pretty much wasted in his previous english lessons because he wasn't ready to learn yet and therefore had to live with the bad degrees. And bad degrees or even degrees in general affect these children way too much. University students are no different! Twenty-something years old and one of the highest priorities is still some numbers (or letters) on a piece of paper...

animus wrote:University students are no different! Twenty-something years old and one of the highest priorities is still some numbers (or letters) on a piece of paper...

You do know that some people are more gifted with either language or mathematics? I consider myself somewhere more language person, which is a job of feminine side of the brain and masculine math for the right side. This I noticed when my colleague student, male as I am, was struggling with language, and I am struggling with math. I know you can also enhance that ability if you pour more energy in it, but sometimes there is something that inhibits/prohibits that ability physically or mentally. I have limitations in my body cant be any taller even if I tried, can get wider though, but not interested of doing so. Oh yea and at the time in the school we were 16-18 years old. 3 years in a lab school together, I think that guy kept going in another school after that to get a higher degree of laboratory analyst, havent heard of him after we had our degree of laboratory assistant. He used to jokingly (maybe even seriously unconsciously) say that he wanted to invent a cure for cancer. Maybe he pursued towards that goal.

This might be nitpicking but I am like that, so dont get offended, I just like to be quite pedantic. Small details bring out the bigger picture I think.

I really worry about my grandkids. The oldest is just entering 1st grade next year. My son and daughter-in-law live in Seattle and are intelligent. My son has worked at Amazon for 10 years. I believe his wife is smarter than all of us, though she is a stay at home mom right now raising the 3 kids. The kids go to a non-traditional preschool, but 1st grade is a different story. Living in Seattle, they have a better chance than most being a more progressive area where teaching is respected. I live in Kansas where schooling is deteriorating quickly due to lack of funding and respect. Though I'm optimistic. I like this new generation coming up. But, I think they are going to need Antiquatis to round out their training.

Ilkka wrote:..., which is a job of feminine side of the brain and masculine math for the right side.

I feel that assigning genders to the sides of the brain is problematic. For example, there is no innate reason for math to be assigned a masculine gender. Females can be equally as good at math as males.

In addition, not everyone's brain fits into the established pattern. Science has a way of noticing a broad pattern and then suddenly making that pattern a standard to conform to. 19% of left-handed people (on average) have their language centers in the right hemisphere. There are also some people after some brain injury who have regained the use of language through the other hemisphere. However, for the most part, science seems more interested in the averages rather than the anomalies, how most people are rather than how they could be.

Arcelius wrote:I feel that assigning genders to the sides of the brain is problematic. For example, there is no innate reason for math to be assigned a masculine gender. Females can be equally as good at math as males.

Yes, I know this. I've figured out that we just use more either side of the brain which has their own jobs to do. I know that this one girl from my lab school she was quite good at math and all that, also she seemed to be more masculine in the inside, mentally, hence using more of the "masculine" side of her brain. Didn't knew about left-handed thing though, but it kinda makes sense, since my little brother and my old friend are both left-handed.

The masculine and feminine sides I remember from old science magazine so it had stuck from there on, it said about their individual jobs etc. And I didn't remember which side was left and which was right.

I thought it would go without saying that there are exeptions of course as "freaks of nature" something that is not like the majority, a "normal". I know all of us are a little off from "normal", some more than others. Once again I am reminded that nothing is self-explanatory. I try to be more thorough next time.

I am just wondering if majority of men still have advantage in math skills and majority of women have advantage in language skills, equally. Well I would be exeption in this thing because I suck at math, basically, never interested me to advance in it. I can do the basics but anything more than simple ones just is too much. I think I can speak good english some rare words require more computing power so not excelling in it, but I try to have the correct terms right. Have forgot Swedish language never had to use it, but I was decent in it, not as good as in english though. Also I did learn a bit French doesn't understand it since its been over about 15 years since I learnt it. I remember at the time I liked Rammstein and wanted to learn their language or something and it turned out that I chose French over German as extra courses. Today, I dont want to learn either of those languages since I wouldn't even use them, so there is no point in doing so. I still like Rammstein sometimes listen it, funny lyrics and all that. My friend had this video from their live show that was awesome at the time it was vulgar. We were in our teens at the time so that was a phase.

Math skill is a skill for me and I need to pour my energy into it, I know this because now when I try to do calculations out or curiosity I fail. I have this notebook from my school days where I have bunch of math equations and I am like this is all "Greek to me". I haven't got a need to use that skill so there you go, forgotten but I think I can remember them when I start doing some math again.

One of the key limitations of Tier 1 vMemes, and why they're very ineffective at scale (but work well at small-scale), is that complexes do not "compose" very well across Tier 1 vMemes - there are exceptions and it usually involves reaching the Systemic vMeme. Complexes in the Systemic vMeme can compose with themselves well and with valuing systems below, but not the other way. This is can be observed in the complete lack of compatibility between the perspectives of a person dominantly valuing life using the Orange vMeme (a CEO of a typical resource-extraction focused, profit-driven corporation delivering value to the economy and creating jobs) and a person dominantly valuing life using the Green vMeme (an environmentalist that believes oil companies and the people leading them are evil and don't care about the planet when something like an oil spill happens or they suppress revolutionary technology).

Each complex in the psyche must traverse the topology of valuing contexts (vMemes) and reach the Systemic platform and settle into it. Once all of the complexes are on board, you can compose each individual complex into a whole (this is the point when you've transitioned) expressing a unified self. You will definitely know when this has happened because enormously complex and dynamic systems will be clear to your intellect (yang) and you will also experience a deep connection to all life around you (yin) - different perspectives won't be scary, you won't feel the need to fight other memes in fear of being infected by "them".

Note that composition works very well here because the laws of associativity and identity are satisfied.

Grounding yourself in the new paradigm is important because if you move too fast and don't take the time to savor and experience your transition through the layers, it can be very easy to slide backwards - this is something I'm intimately familiar with and it's interesting to note that it's not so much a sliding backwards (you can't uncook an egg) as it is an active suppression by the Ego and over-active expression somewhere else (classic workaholic behavior) in order to distract enough complexes from noticing what's really going on.

Note that you can have complexes that reach the Systemic vMeme and others that do not. This is where you get the NewCo movement from or "philanthro-corporation" which is for-profit and delivering a lot of value but also solving hard problem (Tesla is an example of this). Note though that it's not fully systemic because if it was it wouldn't look like anything like a corporation that relies on consumer behavior to survive!

Ah, you seek meaning? Then listen to the music, not the song. - Kosh Naranek

Tulan wrote:Grounding yourself in the new paradigm is important because if you move too fast and don't take the time to savor and experience your transition through the layers, it can be very easy to slide backwards - this is something I'm intimately familiar with and it's interesting to note that it's not so much a sliding backwards (you can't uncook an egg) as it is an active suppression by the Ego and over-active expression somewhere else (classic workaholic behavior) in order to distract enough complexes from noticing what's really going on.

In psychology, that is referred to as "displacement activity," where the TCTB (The Complexes That Be) realize that change is coming and they must engage the lower functions of the brain to distract from advancement. Our global society mimics the internal structure well, as TPTB (The Powers That Be) know that they are "going down," so they engage in fear tactics to try to justify their reason for existence--and control. In Tier 1 levels, your psyche is basically a game of politics and diplomacy. At Tier 2, it inverts from "what's in it for me" to "what can I do to help?"

The Tiers also follow the yin-yang pattern, Tier 1 being yang (localized, bring all to me) and Tier 2 being yin (nonlocal, the "system").

Tulan wrote:Note that you can have complexes that reach the Systemic vMeme and others that do not. This is where you get the NewCo movement from or "philanthro-corporation" which is for-profit and delivering a lot of value but also solving hard problem (Tesla is an example of this). Note though that it's not fully systemic because if it was it wouldn't look like anything like a corporation that relies on consumer behavior to survive!

This is an important point, particularly concerning the Trinity of complexes: the Ego (body), Anima (soul) and Animus (spirit). In RS terms, the Ego is the "scalar dimension" that is coincident with the reference system, and is therefore the most visible, obvious, and demanding. The 2nd dimension of the Anima uses feelings and intuition to alter the behavior of the Ego, but is far more subtle. The 3rd dimension, the Animus, influences both the Anima and Ego, but is just the occasional whisper in the background.

As Nehru points out in his papers, there are three independent dimensions--any one of these primary complexes can "assume control." Anima possession is a known psychological condition, and Animus possession (spiritual possession by an archetype) is known in many religions. But they are usually temporary, as the system tends to realign itself to the "squeaky wheel" -- the Ego wanting the grease.

One must also consider dependent dimensions, which are a mix of the primary complexes of the psyche and the Archetypes, and it is usually a quadrated system (a dichotomy of dichotomies) per dimension. Three dimensions, 4 aspects = 12 signs. This is why there are 12 major expressions of the archetypes as complexes. Though if you want to add them up, there are actually around 600 complexes present in everyone's psyche. Most just don't have a voice.

As Tulan mentions, grounding yourself in a new paradigm would require that all three of the "independent" complexes, the Ego, Anima and Animus, be in Tier 2 valuing. The other 597 complexes will tend to tag along with these "leaders," though may take more time in making the trip.

On occasion, one of the dependent complexes gets a lot of power and assumes control. These situations tend to arise on the failure of the Ego to do it's primary job--keep the body alive. One of the Ego-dependent complexes takes over the reigns and that can lead to some unusual behavior, inconsistent with the normal behavior of a person. Consent to evolve would also be needed to any of these "charged" complexes, as they hold sway on the psyche.

In Tier 1 levels, your psyche is basically a game of politics and diplomacy.

This is an excellent observation and is consistent with Jung's that the psyche (a Tier 1 psyche that is) responds well to "deal making" - like foreign diplomacy.

Also interesting to note that the Prisoner's Dilemma falls apart in Tier 2 because it is predicated on game-playing behavior, this is also one reason why Behavioral Economics is not adequate because Game Theory (at least what I've studied of it) is capped on Tier 1 interactions. It's great for describing the interactions and games played by Tier 1 agents ("consumers") but completely neglects the complex, dynamic and emergent character which is a result of interactions that cross-cut both tiers and also involves Nature which is its own complex, dynamic system that surpasses humanity in its sophistication and effects on "economy". Few people think about this though, some can get to the systems view of economics but that's heavily yang and therefore, usually, limited to the "humans as center of the economic universe" perspective, neglecting the effects of complex dynamic interactions in the temporal realm.

Ah, you seek meaning? Then listen to the music, not the song. - Kosh Naranek

As a newer member to the forum I'd like to ask for some guidance on where to start. If this post is better served as a separate thread please let me know, but as I read through the forum I keep coming across terms that I'm unclear on. For example, where are the descriptions of the tiers that Lone Bear references above? Is there an introductory thread that outlines some of these terms? I've also seen vmeme quite a bit, and have no idea what that means.

I've read all of the --daniel papers and my understanding of RS theory is growing although admittedly there are still many concepts that I'm still working to understand. My main area of interest is the evolution of consciousness, and it seems that most of us here share that aim. I'd really appreciate a suggestion as to where (which thread/area of the website) will give me the best starting point. I figured that I'd finally just ask before continuing to jump around the forum since everything I read seems to only bring up more questions!

Kent wrote:As a newer member to the forum I'd like to ask for some guidance on where to start. If this post is better served as a separate thread please let me know, but as I read through the forum I keep coming across terms that I'm unclear on. For example, where are the descriptions of the tiers that Lone Bear references above? Is there an introductory thread that outlines some of these terms? I've also seen vmeme quite a bit, and have no idea what that means.

That was from 2004, so we've been talking about it for a very long time. Questions would probably be more appropriate in that topic for general concepts.

Kent wrote:I'd really appreciate a suggestion as to where (which thread/area of the website) will give me the best starting point. I figured that I'd finally just ask before continuing to jump around the forum since everything I read seems to only bring up more questions!

With over a thousand topics it is hard to know what to recommend. Might want to let synchronicity do its job and just type some words into the search box up top and see what it turns up.

In general, we tends to use Jungian psychology terms, as they are the best defined. We've also found that the Spiral Dynamics model of psychology fits extremely well into the Reciprocal System model, which is what I use to understand the Universe in which I live (been studying the RS since 1991, though never met Larson--he died a few months before I discovered the RS).

There is very little "channeled" material here, with the exception of the Ra Material, primarily because Don Elkins was a friend of Dewey Larson, so the Law of One also has some material interlocked with the RS.

Most of what is here is personal research using these tools as a common foundation for understanding. All of the material in the --daniel papers originates from this forum, but goes into far more detail.

Tulan wrote:Also interesting to note that the Prisoner's Dilemma falls apart in Tier 2 because it is predicated on game-playing behavior, this is also one reason why Behavioral Economics is not adequate because Game Theory (at least what I've studied of it) is capped on Tier 1 interactions.

I'm not sure most of the people here are familiar with game theory, but I've looked at it and found it to be a misnomer--the theory is supposed to concern logical decision making, such as the Prisoner's Dilemma. From what I found, game theory is based on reactive emotions--not logical decision. To demonstrate that point, put two Vulcans in the Prisoner's Dilemma... you'll get the SAME outcome, every time--neither will turn the other in, because it is the "logical" thing to do. At that point the game becomes pointless, because for Vulcans, there is only one, possible outcome.

The Vulcans were Tier 2 in classic Star Trek (yellow vMeme), dragged back to Tier 1 by the Enterprise series, where Vulcans were "humanized" with all the same petty drives as Terrans. (I was very disappointed by that, as one would think that Vulcans would be far more logical before meeting humans... and contaminated after!)

Tulan wrote:It's great for describing the interactions and games played by Tier 1 agents ("consumers") but completely neglects the complex, dynamic and emergent character which is a result of interactions that cross-cut both tiers and also involves Nature which is its own complex, dynamic system that surpasses humanity in its sophistication and effects on "economy".

I've also noticed that the Minbari "3rd principle of sentient life" is also ignored. Rather curious that the Minbari 3rd principle concerning "self sacrifice" is also Larson's 3rd sector... where the biological urge towards self-preservation is reversed by conscious choice.

But thanks to smartPhones and their ilk, people seem to be changing to NPCs (Non-Player Characters), run by their pocket AIs. It has been unsettling to watch it happen, just over the course of my short life.

Kent wrote:As a newer member to the forum I'd like to ask for some guidance on where to start.

There was an attempt a while ago to serialize the knowledge contained in the forum, an "oral tradition", into some sort of book format or article series. I attempted a similar undertaking myself and even backed up the forum on an encrypted hard drive for a while to make sure there is a historical record of the forum outside of the server and backup system that maintains it.

Such a project is no small task and I quickly gave up, I also didn't have the writing skill at the time to do the material justice. I still want to produce a book codifying the knowledge in this forum with a scholarly attention to detail and production quality, I even want to bind the book by hand! That won't happen though until I stop leasing my time to other people "full-time" and can devote effort to that end.

Because dissemination of thought in the forum is an oral tradition, going through it might take some time but is definitely worth it. Reading primers on the topics and systems of thought that are used to communicate concepts in here can be very helpful in understanding the idioms of the language and thought:

Primer on Jungian Psychology

The neglected facts of science (Larson)

Nothing But Motion (Larson)

Articles on the RS2 website to upgrade concepts from Larson to the state-of-the-art from Bruce and Gopi

That would be a good starting list. There's a definite proclivity for Science Fiction analogies and some computer-system analogies as well, though I think the Reciprocal System holds the most significant presence as a medium for communication. My own background is much more focused on computer systems, software, type systems, and category theory; I have a tendency to communicate more from that context and I do my best to not use too much jargon (or at least explain it if I do).

My own understanding of the RS and RS2 is only at a beginner's level, I have the fundamental concepts down but lack a more refined understanding. It's quite a journey so take your time with all of this, you're among fellow travelers here

Ah, you seek meaning? Then listen to the music, not the song. - Kosh Naranek

Tulan wrote:My own understanding of the RS and RS2 is only at a beginner's level, I have the fundamental concepts down but lack a more refined understanding.

Me too. Although I was new to all this back when I made my account in this forum 3 years ago. All this time has been slow going for understanding RS/RS2 as much as I can. I mean I can read things through quickly, but the comprehension is back there in history that has some catching up to do. Understanding things comes later on. Also coming back to read things once more will help, its all about repetition, much like advertisements they tend to get stuck in memory, because they play em on repeat.

Just remembered that I remember every episode of Stargate SG-1 the moment I see the name of them or at least the beginning of the episode. Have watched the series so many times that I have lost count.

I havent read the older posts in this forum like at all, since there is some new stuff coming up quite fast so no interest of reading "obsolete" information, I like mine fresh.

Ikka wrote:... its all about repetition, much like advertisements they tend to get stuck in memory, because they play em on repeat.

You're talking about the forgetting curve (advertising hijacks it), spaced repetition routines in moderation or re-reading can be important when learning fundamental concepts but be careful to not get wrapped up in memorizing "facts", which is an inefficient learning strategy as you have to carry it around to use it. First principles are what you want to focus on because then you don't need to remember a bunch of things but can instead derive conclusions reliably, when you need to.

Proceeding from first principles also helps prevent "result lock-in" - you see it most often with people who hold fast to "the way its been done" or status quo-knowledge, clearly represented by RS vs. mainstream physics. If you proceed from first principles you can derive new conclusions given new information, or perhaps new information challenges your original set of principles so you figure out what the updated ones are and then derive new conclusions or clearer conclusions.

Also otherwise known as "out of the box" thinking.

Areas where I find spaced repetition routines to be helpful for me are: learning new vocabulary or new languages (programming languages too) where I want to remember enough, long enough, to use it effectively in a conversational or project-based manner in order to habituate a natural absorption. Deliberate practice and use of what you memorize is important, otherwise you will forever chase the forgetting curve, which is inefficient and boring.

Ikka wrote:I havent read the older posts in this forum like at all, since there is some new stuff coming up quite fast so no interest of reading "obsolete" information, I like mine fresh.

The progression of knowledge over time is just as important as the knowledge itself. There are indeed some concepts that have been upgraded over the years in this forum but there is also quite a bit of original and timeless thought scattered about in threads. As it pertains to time, something discussed or introduced a few years ago is by no means "old".

Acquiring the narrative, not just the final exposition, is immensely valuable in my opinion. I'm re-reading old posts myself

Ah, you seek meaning? Then listen to the music, not the song. - Kosh Naranek

Tulan wrote:The progression of knowledge over time is just as important as the knowledge itself. There are indeed some concepts that have been upgraded over the years in this forum but there is also quite a bit of original and timeless thought scattered about in threads. As it pertains to time, something discussed or introduced a few years ago is by no means "old".

Acquiring the narrative, not just the final exposition, is immensely valuable in my opinion. I'm re-reading old posts myself

I wholeheartedly agree. It may seem daunting to pull up a forum sorted by date, and see how much information has been cataloged into the database, but in the overall course of things, it has proven to be very useful for me to go back on occasion to conversations that were had before I arrived here a few years ago and see what was being discussed. Quite often, I've noticed, there is a pattern that presents itself. It seems that consciousness, as it evolves up the spiral, circles around and back to certain topics for discussion again and again by and through different people. In these situations, it appears that repetition is required by consciousness in order to move the development of our budding SMC forward. With that said, there are times when all that is necessary to understand one of these repeating structures is to read where it has been discussed before, and the action produces the same effect as having had the conversations your/ourselves.

"Living is not necessary, but navigation is." --Pompey
"Navigation is necessary in order to live." --Me